The Military Issues & History Forum is a venue to discuss issues relating to the military aspects of the Indian Armed Forces, whether the past, present or future. We request members to kindly stay within the mandate of this forum and keep their exchanges of views, on a civilised level, however vehemently any disagreement may be felt. All feedback regarding forum usage may be sent to the moderators using the Feedback Form or by clicking the Report Post Icon in any objectionable post for proper action. Please note that the views expressed by the Members and Moderators on these discussion boards are that of the individuals only and do not reflect the official policy or view of the Bharat-Rakshak.com Website. Copyright Violation is strictly prohibited and may result in revocation of your posting rights - please read the FAQ for full details. Users must also abide by the Forum Guidelines at all times.

KrishnaK wrote:Either the US actually believed that there were powerful threats that required the MIC that was built up or they made it up knowing full well that the threats did not justify the size of their MIC. The thinking of the people that have wielded power in the US is not like the protocols of the elders of Zion. It is openly available - for example there's a treasure trove of archives of what Nixon and Kissinger said during the 1971 crisis with India. It was recorded verbatim and declassified. Across 70 years and 16 different governments it should be fairly easy to come up with proof that these people made up enemies for power, no ? Why resort to movie quotes ? There's a more believable explanation - military power is built up to hedge against insecurity. For a while now the US has been asking Europe to contribute more, so its own spending can go down. Europe just does not have the political will required to do that at this point.

Insecurity on the part of the Americans who claim that they are suddenly feeling threatened in the Pacific Region from the Chinese. Play up that card in front of gullible elected officials in the US Armed Services Committee in Washington and then billions of dollars miracously flow into the coffers of the American military.

An insecurity that did not exist from 1947 to the early 1990s. Then the Soviet Union collapsed and America then needed a new enemy, which China was ever eager to play.

Then rope in countries in the region (India, Japan, Australia, etc) and make them believe that the evil Chinese are out to annnihilate them. At least in India's case, the China threat existed well before the 1962 Indo-China War. We lost that war due to Nehru's foolishness and not for anything else.

And then make the claim that if you join a US-led alliance, we will help you in a future conflict against China. Whether they actually will, is very much in doubt. And with regards to the bolded part below, now we are being told to reduce our oil imports from Iran.

India and the United States have common interests in fighting Islamist terrorism and in providing a strategic counterweight to China. But India has a fruitful relationship with Iran that they see no reason to sever. Should we “punish” them for that? How would we do that without also “punishing” them for being our allies against the Taliban? Should we have “punished” our ally, France, for not supporting our war in Iraq by not supporting their war in Libya? Or should we have supported our ally Britain for its staunch support in Iraq by joining the very same war against Libya? Should we have rewarded Russia for its support for our war in Afghanistan by dropping our support for Georgian membership in NATO? Or should we have rewarded Georgian support for the Iraq war by pushing harder for their membership in NATO?

"In a democracy, there will always be changes in policies and priorities from one Administration to the next," Obama's statement continued. "But the consistent flouting of agreements that our country is a party to risks eroding America's credibility, and puts us at odds with the world's major powers."

So you can bring in nonsensical comparsions of Lockheed Martin vs Apple. However Apple is not in the arms industry, but Lockheed Martin, Boeing, etc very much are. And thus the same is true with COMCASA. Sign the agreement and then sell billions of dollars of arms to India, from the various American organizations in their MIC. And all the while, claim that this is being done to hedge bets against China.

Just as the headline of the article I posted above states - Countries Don’t Have Friends; Just Interests.

So how does the American MIC continue to thrive? Keep the threat alive - whether real or imagined - and keep buying US arms. It does not service American geopolitical goals to see China disappear. How will the American MIC have Profit & Power then

Because apart from the China threat, what other claim do you really have for India signing COMCASA? None

KrishnaK wrote:These are facts - numbers that happened in the past. What you present are opinions of individuals - much like this

That explains a lot about you! How many shots did you miss when growing up?

Even though I do not support COMCASA or getting too cosy with the US, this I believe was a mistake. China is going full steam ahead with CPEC and instead of countering it with Japan, US and Australia, we are following the age old failed principle of NAM. This will only embolden the chinese to hurt Indian interests impudently. BRI should be countered economically as aggressively as possible.

Either the US actually believed that there were powerful threats that required the MIC that was built up or they made it up knowing full well that the threats did not justify the size of their MIC. The thinking of the people that have wielded power in the US is not like the protocols of the elders of Zion. It is openly available - for example there's a treasure trove of archives of what Nixon and Kissinger said during the 1971 crisis with India. It was recorded verbatim and declassified. Across 70 years and 16 different governments it should be fairly easy to come up with proof that these people made up enemies for power, no ? Why resort to movie quotes ? There's a more believable explanation - military power is built up to hedge against insecurity. For a while now the US has been asking Europe to contribute more, so its own spending can go down. Europe just does not have the political will required to do that at this point.

Precisely, there's no advantage to spending on defense, unless there's some benefit to be gained from it. In the case of India & the US that is security.

The utility of power is geopolitical control that US is able to extract from many of its puppets. Without a strong military it is not possible and that strong military is not possible with out a MIC. A spin off of a strong MIC is arms exports and one more control string with agreements like EUMA, LSA, CISMOA and BECA. Without this kind of hard power do you think it would be easy to exert soft power, control currency flow and OIL?

KrishnaK wrote:I thought the MIC wasn't about profits, but about power. Since we're back on the topic of profits, why not just invest in apple and reap the rewards ?

Apple can be profitable than Lockheed Martin but a Iphone cannot be used to exert geopolitical power like a F-35 ''An apple can rot but a F-35 won't'An apple is a consumer market product and is always profitable. The alternatives for a Iphone are many but an alternative for a F-35 are too few and they also come with strings attached

Trikaal wrote:Even though I do not support COMCASA or getting too cosy with the US, this I believe was a mistake. China is going full steam ahead with CPEC and instead of countering it with Japan, US and Australia, we are following the age old failed principle of NAM. This will only embolden the chinese to hurt Indian interests impudently. BRI should be countered economically as aggressively as possible.

I agree with you in principle Trikaal. The NAM policy was indeed a failed policy. But how non-aligned was India really? Thanks to Nehru and VK Krishna Menon's stupidity, we were anything but non-aligned. From five year plans to a socialistic economy, we largely followed a Soviet economic model. And we paid for that both monetarily and geopolitically. It was a disaster.

Now the pendulum has swung the other way - free market economy. But as one retired Navy Admiral put it, "After leaving the tight embrace of the Russians, must India run into the open arms of the Americans?" We need to be cautious of what we are getting ourselves into. Do not mistake my dismissing the China threat, as China being weak. Far from it. The danger from the Dragon is VERY real. But fear is a choice, which we will buy into if we listen to the few who argue for a blind faith in aligning with America.

This is how it starts. First comes strategic alignment and then comes control. America uses its allies/friends like tissue paper. What do you do with used tissue paper? See the sordid F-16 episode with Pakistan for example. Sure, India benefited from it. But what is the guarantee that tomorrow we will not be at the receiving end of this? Just until a few weeks ago, we were very much facing the threat of sanctions from CAATSA. Trikaal, there are no real friends for India. We are on our own against China. Any future conflict - stone throwing or otherwise - India will have to face alone. Doklam was in 2017, just last year. Where was our new all-weather friend America?

What gives the appearance of a strong Chinese military is NOT the number of ships, planes and tanks they have. It lies in their ability to develop new platforms and mass produce those platforms. Look at chola's posts in the China military thread. And the only way to counter China is to have your own strong and independent MIC that can do the same. Signing agreements carte blanche and doing screwdrivergiri on foreign military platforms will do little to counter the Chinese. In fact, going down that path will achieve the opposite of what the Modi Govt wants India to achieve --> self reliance. The American MIC just wants to sell us platforms and thus the China threat.

So the goal is to pick-and-choose what is right for India ---> Platforms, Agreements, Strategic Alignments. But not to follow everything what the Americans insist that we must do. I suspect that if we do sign the COMCASA agreement in September, it will likely be a neutered, watered down, platform-specific agreement i.e. NASAMS for one. And that may be palatable for the Indian political establishment. Serves multiple goals, but we can avoid listening to the whining from the Amreekis. Again, the goal is to do what is right for India FIRST and not what is right for an imaginary Quad alliance or even an Indo-US alliance.

You brought up the issue of BRI. Now we are being told by the Americans that we must reduce our oil imports from Iran, because Iran is the enemy. Developing the Chabahar Port is one of the key initiatives to counter CPEC. Now we must walk away from our relationship from Iran, because America says so. And then we must follow a US-led alliance to counter BRI. I am very happy that the Indian Govt did not tow the American line. We were told to not buy the S-400 from Russia, because it will harm interoperability with the US. They offered Patriot and THAAD in exchange. But we went ahead with the S-400 purchase anyway. The Americans do not get to tell us what we can buy and what we cannot buy. Signing a blanket CISMOA-type agreement will take us down that path.

KrishnaK wrote:It's Apple selling smartphones that's a trillion dollar company. Lockheed Martin, the world's largest arms seller is valued at 90 billion - less than 1/10th. Do look up the profitability of Facebook vs Lockheed Martin if you're interested in facts.

Mod note:Comparing a consumer electronics firm to an arms conglomerate and claiming they are equivalent, is beyond silly. It verges on trolling and a deliberate attempt to obfuscate a serious discussion by being deliberately obtuse or being facetious.

Reconsider your attitude and participation in this thread. The next time you make such wantonly pointless posts as well as constantly disparage other members as resorting to conspiracy theories etc and in turn vitiating the tone and tenor of the thread and provoking responses, you will get a warning.

Rakesh, George Friedman of Stratfor on Bloomberg said that US either overestimates or underestimates the threat and this is based on need for funding the military and the MIC. FSU threat was overestimated in the 1980s and even when there were signs of collapse not mentioned. China was underestimate all thru the 90s and 2000s. Only after 2008 meltdown suddenly China has become a threat and this is causing sever economic churning in US.

Trikaal, think about this scenario carefully ---> Would China be a threat to India, America and other nations if they bought their arms, instead of developing their own? They have been xerox-copying for decades now, but it is only recently that their efforts are really paying off. And that is causing a lot of discomfort to the Americans. Now put yourself in China's shoes. How do you think they view India, who are still importing a large chunk of her weaponry? A nation's strength lies not in a game of battleship (where we count the number of our platforms vs the number of their platforms) but rather how good those platforms are and how much they can mass produce them. The Chinese have mastered the latter and will very quickly master the former. We have largely overcome the challenges of the former, but are struggling with the latter.

To beat the Chinese at their own game, we need a strong and independent MIC. There are no shortcuts. Doing screwdrivergiri of foreign platforms is going to be a regression of our MIC, instead of a progression.

- Rather than wait for FOC of Tejas (that will come!), focus on improving production of the two lines and even look at a third line.- Rather than wait for unobtanium platform called the FMBT (Future Main Battle Tank), focus on improving Arjun MBT production.- Rather than order additional M777 howitzers, focus on inducting a larger number of Dhanush artillery.

I can go on with the above list. India's saving grace will be in mastering the above. It is not about the platform. On the contrary, it is about mass production with improved variants in each production batch --> whatever the platform may be. This is what the Chinese have learnt well.

Rakesh ji, I totally agree with you on the utmost need for the maturity of MIC. Even World War 2 was a competition between Allied and Axis MICs. Since Allied forces were able to outproduce the Axis powers, they won.

India can never even think of offense as long as we are bogged down in expensive purchases. MIC of a country determines its military prowess. No arguments there.

This is also why I am not in support of attaching to the Americans at the hip. They will never allow our MIC to develop. They will bribe where possible, coerce where they can, and sabotage where they cannot. It is counterproductive for Americans to allow India to be self reliant. They don't want the same Chinese headache to return in a couple of decades in the form of India. They want us to become just like Pakistan, an attack dog that jumps at the master's wishes.

However, I believe we should still leverage the US power where we can. Establishing a common corpus to fund infrastructure projects as a competition to BRI is one such thing we should have considered favorably. Granted, I don't know a lot of technical details about this project and there could be something there that has deterred the establishment.

But if the reason of denial was chinese appeasement then it was wrong. This is something that the indian government resorts to doing quite often. Earlier, it was russian appeasement by buying shit weapons without any tech transfer. Then it was US appeasement from C-17s to NASAMS for a myriad reasons. There is a chance that after wuhan, we have started chinese appeasement too to keep the chinese in good humor. The evidence so far is not sufficient to establish this but there sure is some smoke.

In 1965, during a secret expedition to Nanda Devi, an atomic device got lost and continues to be missing and potentially hazardous to the people of India if it contaminates the Ganga – a concern that was recently voiced by the Uttarakhand tourism minister. The chilling story of international espionage, involving China, the CIA and the Indian government, is now being made into a Hollywood film. Namita Devidayal spoke to the leader of the expedition, Capt Manmohan Singh Kohli , now 88 and living in Delhi, about the three-year-long project that remains one of India’s lurking unsolved mysteries

Tell us a little bit about the background to the expedition.After the Chinese carried out their first nuclear test in 1964, the US decided to spy on China’s nuclear capabilities via India. The CIA asked the Indian government if it could plant a sensor. The government, which at the time blindly followed the CIA, agreed. On June 23, 1965, we did a trial run on Mount McKinley in Alaska, and then went to Nanda Devi, but had to turn back because of bad weather conditions. Unable to carry it back, we left the device there. We went back in May 1966 to search for it, and again in 1967 but had no luck. In 1968, we finally abandoned the search. Because it was a top-secret mission, we were not allowed to disclose what we were doing even to our families. The American agents used aliases. The whole thing was quite exhausting, but we were in the service of the nation.

What was it like to do a covert operation with the US Intelligence?

The CIA was not very straightforward and frank with the Indian government when the device got lost. It kept changing its version. The government did not have a say right from the beginning, so the whole thing ended up being a bit topsy-turvy.

What is the potential damage that can be caused by the nuclear device?

The life of the device is about 100 years and there are still about 40 years left. If it goes into the Rishi-Ganga, the water can get very contaminated and more people would get affected, even die. But once it goes to the main Ganga, there would be quite a lot of dilution, and some people might suffer but it would not lead to fatalities. According to my estimates, the device is very hot and once it touches the glacier, it will start sinking until it touches rock. Then it won’t move.

What has prevented the Indian government from locating the device and preventing any fallout?

It may be worthwhile to try to locate it now that technology has improved and there is machinery that can penetrate ten to fifteen feet of ice. But using such equipment is very expensive and the question remains whether the Indian government should use its own money or persuade the CIA to do the needful.

Do you think China might know where the device is?

I don’t think so. The device is not active. There are four parts to the device – the generator with the plutonium capsules, two transmitter sets, and one big aerial to collect the radio waves – and they are all buried separately. If not connected together, there is very little possibility of anyone finding it.

There have been reports that Hollywood producer Scott Rosenfelt (of Home Alone fame) is making a film about this.

They’ve completed the script already and chosen Greg Mclean as director.Now they are going to choose the cast, and they might pick Ranbir Kapoor to play me. They spoke to his mother and she was positive.They had told me that shooting will start sometime in March 2020. They have kept the story 100% authentic.

^^Not to say US has improved, but that was India of 60s a country defeated by China, living on US ships (Ship to Lip) with a recovering leadership under Shastri ji. Today it is a much stronger India. Although perceptions are yet to change. US' Chi-pak pasandi is not an imaginary thing

“We can’t say that we are going to insulate India from a potential fallout (of sanctions under the Countering America’s Adversaries Through Sanctions Act, CAATSA) no matter what they do — I would say that such an impression would be misleading,” said Randall G. Schriver, assistant secretary of defence for Asian and Pacific Security Affairs at the US department of defence.Asked how the US viewed India’s potential purchase of the S-400 system from Russia, he added, “We still have some very significant concerns if India pursued major new systems and platforms with Russia. That will be the President’s decision.”

Schriver said defence secretary James Mattis had requested a waiver for India from the CAATSA because he wanted relations with India to improve and strengthen.“We know where we want this relationship to go, whether it is to persuade to go a different course (from Russia), take us as a major defence partner, we know where we want this to go,” he added.

“The S-400 is a system that is particularly troubling for a lot of reasons. India is our friend, a sovereign country,” he said.“Our strong preference is to seek alternatives (or else it would impinge on a number of issues) including the future of our defence cooperation,” Schriver added.

Will the US fill the void?

Asked if the US would be willing to offer India alternatives, he replied: “We are willing to talk to India about meeting defence requirements and alternatives. They may not be the exact systems. We have had that conversation.”

Also read: Modi realises he still needs Putin as the world order is turning upside down

Earlier, in his opening remarks in conversation with Carnegie fellow and India hand Ashley Tellis, Schriver said the Pentagon was aware of legacy issues that India had with Russia on supplies and spares of military equipment.

Russia is India’s largest supplier of military equipment, and has been (as the USSR) since 1971.“But we want to have a conversation with India that is not about the past, the legacy, but about the future,” he said.

Schriver flagged three issues where he expected there would be concrete results from the 2+2 dialogue.

The first would be on a set of “enabling agreements” on secure communications and technology. This implies the US expects its proposed Communications Compatibility and Secrecy Agreement (COMCASA), a military secrecy pact, to get India’s approval.

The second, he said, would be to expand the scope of military exercises. The expansion would bring more elements in terms of platforms, and may also involve aircraft, submarines, ships and army units not just in greater numbers but in joint operations.

The third area, Schriver added, would be an augmentation of the 2+2 dialogue with more 2+2 meetings at executive levels, below the levels of the ministers and secretaries.

These would be in addition to security reviews in the Indo-Pacific region.

India is friend and a sovereign country are mutually exclusive items. The US official expectations for coercion are silly.As India is sovereign they reserve the right to defend themselves.Being a friend will not act adverse to US interests.Buying S-400 is a sovereign interest of India.So buzz off.

Rakesh wrote:The Amreekis really love to shoot themselves in the foot. Why would they even say something this dumb, before the 2+2 meet?

Its a planned policy on part of US Gov of Carrot and Stick , The carrot is the incentive to buy more US arms , sign the enabling agreement and the Stick is the threat to impose sanction if we dont agree to it.

This is not an off the cuff remark before 2+2 but a negotiating tactic by US.

The statement by one of the many assistant sec def is for US domestic consumption, particularly the press and US congress. There may also be those who are deliberately trying to sabotage India-US relations.

Rakesh wrote:The Amreekis really love to shoot themselves in the foot. Why would they even say something this dumb, before the 2+2 meet?

I imagine its because he's also addressing a domestic constituency, and wants to retain the impression (facade?) of being 'strong' on Russia.

Fortunately for him, his Indian counterparts' understanding of posturing is second to none. He will have his 'concerns' to express to us, we will have loads of sympathy for him, along with adrak wali chai and Marigold biscuits, while being, in turn, unable to oblige due to our own 'concerns'.

In practical terms, he probably understands that to actually impose sanctions will be the ideal outcome for Russia, given that, in his boss Gen. Mattis' words, it'll set the relationship with India back by a decade, if not more.

That being said, I do though expect the Indian side to try to keep the S-400 purchase, as well as the 2+2 meet, fairly low key.

There will be a lot of US rona dhona about the S-400 in the press and by politicians. The reality is, the S-400 doesn’t exist in any significant numbers and India will get newly painted S-300s with a different launcher. Russian mil hardware historically has low operational availibility and the Indian armed forces improve them through Herculean efforts. With lots of follow up costly maintenance. When the balloon goes up maybe 1 out 3 launches will go.

Dump the S-400 and spend $4 billion on the Akash which will be a far more dependable system and the infrastructure development stays in India.

If US tries to sanction India, two things will happen. We buy Russia and stop any deal with US, triggering sanctions. Or we stop buying large system from Russia, however GoI cannot switch over to US because the opposition will bled them dry on charges of bending to US blackmail.

Given that GoI usually does not take risk, it might drop buying new large system from Russia to prevent sanctions and nothing from US to prevent charges of giving in to blackmail.

GoI will then be forced to go local. There will no other option. We might make component deals, however GoI will be forced to build system locally.

Lucky we have jumped over the learning curve and have a decent ecosystem in place.

Austin wrote:Its a planned policy on part of US Gov of Carrot and Stick , The carrot is the incentive to buy more US arms , sign the enabling agreement and the Stick is the threat to impose sanction if we dont agree to it.

This is not an off the cuff remark before 2+2 but a negotiating tactic by US.

We will be forced to go local. US can stuff the carrot and eat the stick. By going local, we will not trigger the sanction and can go weeping to the Russians to give component tech instead of whole system. We will pay by buying gas or through third party deals.

Austin wrote:Its a planned policy on part of US Gov of Carrot and Stick , The carrot is the incentive to buy more US arms , sign the enabling agreement and the Stick is the threat to impose sanction if we dont agree to it.

This is not an off the cuff remark before 2+2 but a negotiating tactic by US.

We will be forced to go local. US can stuff the carrot and eat the stick. By going local, we will not trigger the sanction and can go weeping to the Russians to give component tech instead of whole system. We will pay by buying gas or through third party deals.

Why accept that US can enforce its will on India and dictate terms to us??

We are paying OUR money for the capability to defend and advance OUR supreme national interests.

Doesn't the whole sanctions thing sound contrived?? Why pay protection money, as it were, to the US when we do not benefit from it??

Why do we have to cut off from our source for spares and weapons?? or is the US planning to supply us with Su30 MKI spares??

What happens if there are "sanctions" against france tomorrow?? Where does it end??

in what way is buying US arms at inflated rates different from paying protection money??

Its not just about Russian kit but come november it will be about Iranian Oil and Chabar port

Some one sitting at high office in Washington wants to dictate on what Indian foreign policy should be and how a Sovereign Nation like India should deal with ROW.

If US applies any sanction on India we should just put blanket sanction on buying further US arms and if US resorts to blackmail by stopping spares and maintenance which they would we should just dumb their equipment for good for the next 100 years , We have survived US arms embargo for 50 years and now we have a vibrant indiginious industry too.

Austin wrote:Its not just about Russian kit but come november it will be about Iranian Oil and Chabar port

Some one sitting at high office in Washington wants to dictate on what Indian foreign policy should be and how a Sovereign Nation like India should deal with ROW.

If US applies any sanction on India we should just put blanket sanction on buying further US arms and if US resorts to blackmail by stopping spares and maintenance which they would we should just dumb their equipment for good for the next 100 years , We have survived US arms embargo for 50 years and now we have a vibrant indiginious industry too.

The US supplies us with defensive systems while Russia supplies us with offensive systems including nuke submarines on lease.

Austin wrote:Its not just about Russian kit but come november it will be about Iranian Oil and Chabar port

Some one sitting at high office in Washington wants to dictate on what Indian foreign policy should be and how a Sovereign Nation like India should deal with ROW.

If US applies any sanction on India we should just put blanket sanction on buying further US arms and if US resorts to blackmail by stopping spares and maintenance which they would we should just dumb their equipment for good for the next 100 years , We have survived US arms embargo for 50 years and now we have a vibrant indiginious industry too.

The US supplies us with defensive systems while Russia supplies us with offensive systems including nuke submarines on lease.

It is not about what Russia can supply or what US cant ....most of the post-Independence we have lived under US Sanctions blanket sanctions on Defence Purchase , Nuclear and Space program , Semi-Partial sanction on economy ........Memory can be short.

THis is about dictating our foreign policy when even in our worst days of 50-60's we have not toed to............Today they will start with Arms and Oil tomorrow it will be about Agriculture and Nuclear reactor and some other day something else.

If you give an Inch to a Bully he will take a Mile.

There is good reason why many of our Neighbours Respect China more than India , if we fall under pressure on Russia and Iran now we will loose our own Sovereignity and any friendly neighbour who would trust India because we will be bulkheading US foreign policy in our region and a policy that is in Interest of India.

nam wrote:We need to smarter at making deals. If not oil, we will pay for Iranian wheat or mud. Chabar, tell the Afghans to go apesh***, if US blocks Afghan trade through the port.

The reality of the world we live in, is US sanctions bite. There is hardly a need bring it upon us. US, Europe & Asia are our trading market. Not Iran, not CIS, not Russia.

Need to be greedy, look after our interest, not be a morally upright looser.

The sanctions aren't against oil per se but against all trade with Iran. So wheat, mud or poop everything is covered. No bank will facilitate dollar transfer for Iranian trade and if a bank does, then it will be blacklisted by US thus denying the bank the ability to buy/sell dollars in international market.

Afghans are surviving on the mercy of Americans. If they decide to go 'apes**t', US might leave them to the Taliban and we all know how that is going to turn out. So no way afghans bite or even bark against the hand that feeds them.

You are ofcourse correct about US sanctions hurting and that there is no point needlessly antagonizing America. In my opinion, India should agree to stop buying Iranian oil provided that US agrees to ship shale oil at the same rate as Iranian oil. India shouldn't be forced to pay extra because of US sanctions but as long as US is ready to sell us oil at 'friendship' pruces, screw the iranians.

Trikaal wrote:The sanctions aren't against oil per se but against all trade with Iran. So wheat, mud or poop everything is covered. No bank will facilitate dollar transfer for Iranian trade and if a bank does, then it will be blacklisted by US thus denying the bank the ability to buy/sell dollars in international market.

Afghans are surviving on the mercy of Americans. If they decide to go 'apes**t', US might leave them to the Taliban and we all know how that is going to turn out. So no way afghans bite or even bark against the hand that feeds them.

Which is fine. Hardly worth fighting the US over a port, where all we send is wheat and there is nothing worthwhile to transport to CIS/Russia using the Northern transport corridor.

There is nothing we can do to save the Afghan either.

Play all side, play for time, play for your self interest. Let's learn from Paks,( ofcourse not make their mistakes). They are BFF with Americans & now Russians, despite killing their soldiers. And get Chinese to pay for being where they are. So we have a fine example.

Trikaal wrote:The sanctions aren't against oil per se but against all trade with Iran. So wheat, mud or poop everything is covered. No bank will facilitate dollar transfer for Iranian trade and if a bank does, then it will be blacklisted by US thus denying the bank the ability to buy/sell dollars in international market.

It doesnt matter of dollar is blocked , The EU is not playing ball with US on this sanction so we can pay in Euro or any other IMF approved reserves .......Worse cum worse a Rupee/Rial trade .......there are many way to work around this it is least of the problem.

The first would be on a set of “enabling agreements” on secure communications and technology. This implies the US expects its proposed Communications Compatibility and Secrecy Agreement (COMCASA), a military secrecy pact, to get India’s approval.[/b]The second, he said, would be to expand the scope of military exercises. The expansion would bring more elements in terms of platforms, and may also involve aircraft, submarines, ships and army units not just in greater numbers but in joint operations.

The third area, Schriver added, would be an augmentation of the 2+2 dialogue with more 2+2 meetings at executive levels, below the levels of the ministers and secretaries.

These would be in addition to security reviews in the Indo-Pacific region.

Expect their demands become louder and more mainstream as India purchases more and more weaponry from them

I just say "How dare you talk like that ..go ahead and stuff your 2 plus 2 into you know where" and call off those meets

Austin wrote:It doesnt matter of dollar is blocked , The EU is not playing ball with US on this sanction so we can pay in Euro or any other IMF approved reserves .......Worse cum worse a Rupee/Rial trade .......there are many way to work around this it is least of the problem.

EU will play ball, bridge or croquet once US asks firmly. The resistance is in name only to save some face and hope to deter America. They are all already falling in line. The voices of dissent against America are already dying. Best case scenario for EU, EU will manage to get Trump to roll back tarrifs on EU countries before blocking Iran out of Euro. The only way to trade with Iran will be rupee, nothing else.

Russia continues to sell its top tech from S-400 to Nuke subs to India in spite of India diversifying its suppliers to Israel, France & US..

With US it would be a different ball game. Either you are with the US or against the US..

Unfortunately, we have a weak PM running India who is happy to short sell the country..

RIP India's independence and strategic autonomy..

Wow, you say that like they are doing it as a favour to us and not for hard cash. Also, what an awesome ally in Russia we have, one who sells same or better equipment to our most dangerous enemy china. Russia sold us S-400 after china, Russia sold us Su-30 and sold china Su-35. Truly an awesome ally, we should all bend over and pay our obeisance to the great Czar Putin.

Russia continues to sell its top tech from S-400 to Nuke subs to India in spite of India diversifying its suppliers to Israel, France & US..

With US it would be a different ball game. Either you are with the US or against the US..

Unfortunately, we have a weak PM running India who is happy to short sell the country..

RIP India's independence and strategic autonomy..

Wow, you say that like they are doing it as a favour to us and not for hard cash. Also, what an awesome ally in Russia we have, one who sells same or better equipment to our most dangerous enemy china. Russia sold us S-400 after china, Russia sold us Su-30 and sold china Su-35. Truly an awesome ally, we should all bend over and pay our obeisance to the great Czar Putin.

If India is paying cash, Will US lease their Nuke sub to India with no strings attached and autonomy to operate it?

Is it Russia's fault if India could not close the S-400 deal prior to Chinese S-400 deal?

Russia would sell their equipment to make money while on the other hand US would provide equipment to Pakistan for free to keep a check on India.

India always had the option to buy SU-35. It was India's decision not to buy them as India wanted better tech through Super Sukhoi upgrade.

Enjoy reading the following about INS Jalashwa Formerly USS Trenton:

The Indian government has embraced EUMA despite concerns expressed within the official establishment over its restrictive and invasive clauses.

For example, Navy chief Admiral Suresh Mehta had publicly described EUMA as 'intrusive.' Speaking at an April 2008 conference organised by the London-based International Strategic Studies Institute in New Delhi, Admiral Mehta said: 'There are certain things we can't agree to. As a sovereign nation, we can't accept intrusiveness into our system, so there is some fundamental difficulty.'

He added: 'The US may have this kind of (end user) agreements with everyone. I don't believe in that. We pay for something and we get some technology. What I do with it, is my thing.'

In fact, India's Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG) in a March 2008 report criticized the end-use monitoring clauses in the contract for the USS Trenton/INS Jalashwa. (No sooner the US had transferred that transport ship to India than a gas leak killed an Indian officer and five sailors on board.)[]

The CAG report stated: 'Restrictive clauses raise doubts about the real advantages from this deal... For example, (there are) restrictions on the offensive deployment of the ship and permission to the (US) government to conduct an inspection and inventory of all articles transferred under the end-use monitoring clause of the LOA (Letter of Offer and Acceptance issued by the US government).'

Note that the contract contains even 'restrictions on the offensive deployment of the ship.'

Against this background, the Indian government ought to have taken Parliament into confidence on the EUMA rather than place on record just the two sentences on the agreement found in Krishna's statement on Clinton's visit.

[*] The MLSA envisages exchange of services and logistics. If it gets signed, the Indian and American militaries will provide logistic support, berthing and refueling facilities to each other's warships and aircraft on a barter or equal-value exchange basis. But given that the Indian military, including the navy, has no deployments or operations outside the region, the MSLA, in effect, would be a one-sided arrangement.

[] The purchase of the USS Trenton was severely criticized by the Comptroller and Auditor General, which in its report raised several questions, including why the ship was bought when the US Navy itself had concluded in 2003 that the ship was not suitable for modernization ought to be decommissioned in 2006. The report pointed out gas leaks on board other Trenton-type ships in which three American sailors lost their lives.